On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Moshe Zadka wrote:
daemonize() is cool, useful and should really be refactored out of twistd I really see no harm in providing more functionality in t.i.main Flamewars re: correct debian packaging will be left for later.
[snip] Daemonize's functionality is probably useful, however, there are a few things it doesn't take into account. Insofar as it's useful, most of twistd should probably be incorporated into it; any less is offering incomplete functionality. After all, this is about as platform specific as you get. If we have daemonize, then we probably want to have a similiar function for starting a Windows Service. Moreover, it would be good if we could detect which platform we're on, then do the appropriate thing for creating a daemon on that platform. This implies logging. "daemonize" won't work if you're still writing to standard output after you call it. So I'd say daemonize should at least take a logfile, and a function + varargs, and never return.
Here's a quick thought about Debian packaging: add a script to ./bin "debianize". This script will take a .tap file and create a package named the same as the .tap file which relevant /etc/init.d/package and /var/lib/package/package.tap Perhaps even add it as a generic argument to mktap, so mktap --debian web --static /var/www will create the debian package. One caveat: version numbers.
This sounds cool, with one minor caveat. I don't want to give windows users the impression that they're totally unsupported, especially any more than they already are. We should make plans to have similiar windows-ize scripts, and even if we don't have them, make it clear that we're not trying to make a debian-specific server infrastructure. Also, wouldn't this "debian" functionality be very similiar for redhat, mandrake, etc? Even solaris and MacOS X? "unixize" might be a better name for it. ______ __ __ _____ _ _ | ____ | \_/ |_____] |_____| |_____| |_____ | | | | @ t w i s t e d m a t r i x . c o m http://twistedmatrix.com/users/glyph